Preamble- there are MANY new sauce and product makers trying to get their businesses off and running. Many use online forums to promote their products, whether it's through posted reviews, posted videos or other social forums. I believe, and have seen, that most people in the hot chile community support the exploration of new flavors and products. The chilehead community is helpful to a fault for a great product and new producer. I'm right on board for that. There are several new producers I'm trying to help and other producers I'm working with as a co-producer and possibly co-vendors at shows and conventions. It's a lot of CO-operation within the community.

I suppose one of the main reasons for posting this is to try to elevate awareness of what it means to be a licensed processor and to make a safely processed sauce/product and also about the market of said sauces.

For this discussion, I use the term "legal product" to mean any processed product OFFERED FOR SALE, made in an inspected facility (could be a home, could be a commercial place, as long as the producer is licensed and inspected) with proper local/state/fda licensing (whatever is required for the product)-versus-all the sauces/products OFFERED FOR SALE that are cooked up and sold to consumers... via any venue, (sold on the internet, sold out of the back of a truck...any place that can't check a health /food licence...)..without a license.

Some products, like dried herbs/spices require minimal licensing. For this discussion, I'd like to keep it to PROCESSED products. Giving away, bartering...that's a whole other topic and not going to talk about that.....we're talking about are "OFFERED FOR SALE" items.

This is my own personal view about LEGAL sauces and HOBBY sauces. Feel free to chime in with your own views, I'm sure this will be a LIVELY discussion!

Many sentiments about home made sauces being sold to consumers are heard over and over. Let's look at a couple.... And for this missive, when I say "you" I am not referring to any one particular person. It's generally directed to a "you, the consumer"... this is coming from my view as a legally licensed food processor.

Basic issues like Labeling-I've seen many labels on hobby sauces that do not properly call out the ingredients. If someone doesn't know what tamari is, (and they have a soy or wheat allergy....) and they eat a sauce containing tamari....

"I've been cooking/canning/pickling this way for 40 years, never had a problem yet."Things and ingredients change. Just one example- tomatoes used to have a much higher natural acid content and it used to be safe to hot water bath tomatoes when home canning. New hybred tomatoes have a much lower natural acid content, and it is no longer acceptable to hot water bath tomatoes from the garden. Now, it is recommended to pressure can tomatoes, the same as green beans and most other vegetables.

Now... if you have Granny's salsa recipe from 40 years ago that used heirloom tomatoes with a high acid content, yea, it was fine for the 40 years Granny made it. But if you try to make that sauce now and not pressure can it... with lower acid tomatoes, and fresh onions and garlic...that is a Nasty-Soup waiting to happen, and the botulism that can grow in that hot water bathed batch of home made salsa can kill someone! Not just make them sick....it can KILL THEM!

Do YOU want to take that risk? Did you realize the pH is different with different tomatoes? If you had sent Granny's Salsa in to a food lab for testing, you would know that the pH is not low enough to inhibit Nasties from growing and you would have known to pressure can the salsa. Would a producer want to take that risk of killing someone because you don't know what the pH is? Do you as a consumer want to take that risk based on Granny's Recipe(It's been made this way for 40years...) but the pH might not be right?

"next thing you know the government will be regulating how I store food in my own home..."Well, what you do in your own home to your own self is your own business, as long as it doesn't affect others!

When someone comes over for dinner at my house, they can make a judgement call about the environment in which the food has been prepared. Are the counters clean or full of dishes with rotten food in them? Are there bugs/vermin/catsonthecounter? Is the food hot? Is there garbage piled on the porch with rodent droppings everywhere? Is there meat sitting on the counter at room temperature?

A "consumer" (aka guest for dinner) can make a judgement call whether to stay for dinner or to leave. Buying from an un-licensed person via an online website...you cannot make any judgement call as to the safety of the sauce you are buying and eating, therefore you, as the consumer, should rely on the the health licensing authority to make sure your sauce was prepared in a clean, pest-free environment and was processed in a way to ensure the safety of YOU and your family. Does the producer even know that mixing soap and bleach will cancel out the bleach so there is no sanitization?

The rules/regulations are there to protect YOU the consumer from what you cannot see. YOU cannot visit the meat packing plant that processes the ground beef that is used in the burger you just bought at the Drive-Thru for your self and your little kids, and the kids from the ball team that are riding home with you. YOU cannot see the temp of that meat patty as it's being cooked on the (what's that in the corner of the grill???) how-clean-is-it food establishment.So, you rely on the health authorities to make sure your meat doesn't contain e-coli and is cooked to the proper temp so all the little angels don't get sick from under-cooked burger. Ever heard of the Jack-in-the-Box problem in the 90's? if you don't look it up, then look up spinach e-coli)

That "clean environment and safe processing" can be achieved in a home kitchen WHERE IT IS LEGAL TO DO SO!!!! It is not totally required to put in a $$$$$ food kitchen. LOOK AROUND! there are many options of kitchens to use! There are many posts here on THP about using other kitchens for a legal business.

If, where you live, it is not legal to make products to sell out of your home kitchen, then Yea...it sucks....but you better get legit before "going into business".

If someone sells a sauce that is illegally made and (GOD FORBID!) someone gets sick and it can be traced to that bad sauce, that sauce maker could be in HUGE trouble for fines and liability and damages lawsuits. If you (the sauce maker) present yourself and your product as a licensed, tested product, you are in a world of hurt if something happens! I'm not a lawyer, and this is totally up for correction from a person who knows, but...it seems that the "perception" of being licensed is enough to cause the sauce maker a world of grief.

Just for myself, this last year, I've paid over $2100 for food lab tests, health licenses, BPCS plus a week of my life (if you are making a sauce to sell and don't know what the BPCS is, you shouldn't be making a sauce to sell!), Product liability insurance, water system bacterial and microbial tests, state business license- and that's just what I can remember off the top of my head. That's just to have a LEGAL sideline food business, not including all the state and federal TAXES that have to be paid when a person runs a legal business.

That is the type of things legal sauce makers do. Isn't that perseverence and dedication to do things the right way to protect their customers' health worth something? I've been in this business for 18 years, and I've always done it legal. I've had to make choices like- should I pay my state license of $55 or start a web site? $500 of business insurance or 5 entries in a food contest? I paid the insurance. Doing it right does suck, cuz I don't have nearly the buzz, but I can sleep at night knowing I'm doing it right.

I TOTALLY support the new sauce makers and hope they get lots of reviews and press. Hobby Saucers are how every sauce making business I know of was born. That one great review from a highly recognized blog might be just the nudge needed for someone to take it to the next step.

But it IRKS me when hobby sauces are lauded on the blogs and it's not even mentioned whether they are being produced and sold legally or not. (personal pet peeve) And, I hope the bloggers will recognize the difference and start to differentiate between the two in their reviews. Licensed sauce makers should be identified as such compared to hobby saucers. Licensed Sauce Makers are likely sacrificing publicity to do it properly.

My personal feeling is-if it is presented as a home made, un-tested hobby sauce...sell it, give it away, trade it, whatever...as long as it is not presented as a legally produced sauce. If the consumer knows what they are buying, then the risk is on the consumer. At that point, it comes back to The Dinner Situation. If the kitchen is clean, you feel comfortable staying for dinner. If you can't see the stove for the filth, you may choose to leave before dinner.

One other note- hot sauces are pretty easy to safely make, which is why I, and most people, feel comfortable buying and eating them from unlicensed people. That does not make it legal to sell unlicensed sauces. I cannot condone selling ANYTHING made with dairy or meat that is not totally legally licensed. That whole meat and dairy thing is VERY RISKY. Don't (mess) around with selling anything meat or dairy if you are not properly licensed.

My main profession is as a self employed electrician, my second life passion is a food business. Both of those professions can kill people if those who are doing the work don't know what the hell they are doing. Both are highly regulated... FOR A REASON...to keep (you!) the consumer alive. Both cost a ..lot! $$$ of money to do safely.

yea, you could get your sister's ex-fiance's half-brother's former nephew to wire your house....but .. really, what does your sister's ex-fiance's half brother's former nephew really know about wiring a house? What's gonna happen to that house if that person don't know $#!T? Who's gonna stand behind the work? ...not your sister's ex-fiance's half-brother's former nephew....and what kind of damage could that person generate....

Whether it's food service, or electricical, or car engine repair or website design... people who are not in that business should recognise what they DON'T know and allow those who do know... to protect the health and safety of themselves and their families.

The bottom line for this post is- do it right or don't present yourself as a legitimate sauce business...cuz you're not.

I absolutely agree, the risk you run selling a "hobby" sauce is definitely worth considering, notably the same personal liabilities apply for those who are not properly insured. You could find yourself in serious trouble... Personally.I know many will see the risk as minimal, and perhaps in some ways it is (pertaining to products made with low-risk ingredients) but is it worth the risk of being personally liable? I guess that's a decision the individual needs to make.For me at least, I would never consider risking it.

I'm utterly exhausted writing this, so my statement may be all over the place, but that's my thoughts.

Very little is needed to make a happy life; it is all within yourself, in your way of thinking

Nice article! Don't see too many Lady Electricians around, even less in the Mechanics field. As a Mechanic I see substandard auto repairs all the time, I saw some nasty stuff while working in the Restaurant Bar trade in my early years, its surprising more people don't get sick. I still pound(verbally) on my kids when they put meat above the veggies, or not sanitizing the cutting board after cutting some MR pork for the stir fry.

I really like your analogy between guests eating at your house and "guests" acquiring your sauce online.

"next thing you know the government will be regulating how I store food in my own home..."Well, what you do in your own home to your own self is your own business, as long as it doesn't affect others!

When someone comes over for dinner at my house, they can make a judgement call about the environment in which the food has been prepared. Are the counters clean or full of dishes with rotten food in them? Are there bugs/vermin/catsonthecounter? Is the food hot? Is there garbage piled on the porch with rodent droppings everywhere? Is there meat sitting on the counter at room temperature?

A "consumer" (aka guest for dinner) can make a judgement call whether to stay for dinner or to leave. Buying from an un-licensed person via an online website...you cannot make any judgement call as to the safety of the sauce you are buying and eating, therefore you, as the consumer, should rely on the the health licensing authority to make sure your sauce was prepared in a clean, pest-free environment and was processed in a way to ensure the safety of YOU and your family. Does the producer even know that mixing soap and bleach will cancel out the bleach so there is no sanitization?

It is clear that the reason for the barriers to selling a "legal sauce" are there for the purpose of "consumer safety"... However I disagree that consumers should rely on health licensing authorities. I think that "should" implies two things about the health licensing authorities that are false. These are that such authorities are 1) necessary, and 2) effective, and.

1) Necessary:

Without specific legal barriers to entry into the sauce sales market (ie government approved kitchens/safety standards), there are already legal consumer protections: That is what tort law is. If I get sick, I can sue the maker - hobby sauce or not. That incentives sauce makers to make their products safe, and if they fail and somebody gets sick, they will likely be driven out of business by the impending lawsuit and resulting storm of bad press/reviews. Additionally, if a sauce maker falsely advertizes that they take certain safety precautions which they do not, there are criminal sanctions for fraud and false advertising - which will have a pretty strong effect in keeping people from doing that.

3rd party companies/organizations can easily fill the role of the governmental authorities beyond the above cited legal remedies. Such groups don't really exist now, but that is because the ideal system is stifled by the current legal scheme. If consumers did not expect to be protected from bad sauce makers, they would be incentivised to gauge the risks of products before purchasing. This demand would fuel the existence of companies that would be willing, for a price, to test sauces for safety, and publish the results. Working on a profit basis, they would be significantly more efficient than bureaucratic agencies, and thus would cost much less to sauce makers. Consumers could look for approval by such companies as a sign of safety - and again false advertising of testing would create civil and criminal liability to a bad sauce maker under already existing legal principles.

When buying a sauce from a website, just like when I go to somebody's house for dinner, there are many clues that let a consumer know if and how legitimate/safe this sauce may be. For instance, why is this sauce only sold by the maker on his own site, and no vendors carry it? How much money and effort went into making this website? Does the site actually make any claims about where and how the sauce is prepared, what level of safety precautions they take? Did they obtain an approval from a respected testing company? These clues help inform a consumer and let them gauge and take their own risks. Thus legal requirements of licensing and using approved kitchens etc are not necessary, the benefits they create would be expected in a free market.

2.) Effective

I will make this one brief. I mean effective in the sense of minimizing the number of people who are adversely affected by bad sauce (get sick etc). Adhering to the current health/safety standards, by a sauce maker, certainly helps ensure some set minimum level of safety, and without it, there would be some sauces that were less safe on the market. But it is clear that this minimum does not provide full protection, even adhering to these standards, bad products make their way to the shelves on occasion. The biggest difference is, that under a protectionist system, consumers expect every product they buy to be safe. This leads them to exercise little to none of their own risk assessment in using products. They buy a new sauce, "it must be safe because it was sold and the government protects me... So Ill just guzzle down 1/2 the bottle". When bad products do get onto the shelves, this mentality causes large numbers of people to get sick. If instead consumers were looking out for themselves, they may be careful with their new products, try them in small amounts, watch reviews for them to make sure other people didn't report getting sick from them etc. In short, under a system without the safety protections, consumers would look out for themselves, and the result would be fewer people getting sick from bad products.

Final thoughts:

The health authorities certainly are not a complete failure, I just think they are less than ideal, harm personal freedom, and that without them our system would work better (at least in a hot sauce context - meat/dairy may be different). I fully support anybody who wants to sell a "hobby sauce." I also think safety is important, but health licensing groups do not help reconcile sauce making with consumer safety on the grand scale. Like SL said, most sauces are pretty easy to make safely, so the danger is pretty low and I am personally willing to bear it in some cases, at least for myself, and I think that should be my decision to make. Under the current system though, I would think its a bit risky to keep selling a "hobby sauce" for long.

As I mentioned - while growing my hobby I was clear with anyone who offered to buy it that I was not in business yet - they were hobby/ prototype sauces prepared as safely as I knew how (e.g. Pasteurization, hot packing, pH tested, clean workspace) but they were not professionally produced.

Like you I've purchased & traded for numerous hobby sauces and none have made me I'll or caused any issue. But it was my judgement call as to whether or not I wanted to incur that risk.

The FDA has a reputation for crippling fines for those who skirt the rules & offer product for sale as a legit authorized business, but aren't. The rules are there for a reason - questioning the rules doesn't superceed the legitimacy of them, and I'm shocked to see so many try to take that position. "it's a dumb law!" - yeah, try explaining that to a cop writing you a ticket for 105 in a 40 mph zone. You'll still be explaining whil he's hand cuffing you for reckless driving. And for the same reason - danger to public safety.

The history of food safety is pretty interesting. I saw a documentary on it (forget the name) but it was around the early 1900s and lots of people were getting sick & dying because there was nothing in place to protect the public. When America was struggling with the Depression, producers cut corners - used questionable practices & ingredients & the public health crisis became so dire that government agencies were formed, which is why we have them today.

Food safety is not a case of "big government infringing on the little guy" - quite the opposite. It's one if the few government agencies devoted to the protection of the consumer (millions of "little guys") against dangerous business practices.

Some here have seen me posting over the last many months since I joined. I've seen my trademark & labels finalized, I've secured a co- packer, I've had recipes tested, I've validated my co-packer's ingredient sources...all while keeping my day job. It's a he'll of a lot of expense & effort. Believe me - last weekend I would have preferred to hang out on the couch watching baseball instead of going back & forth with 20 label revisions.

But the way to do this business correctly is not the path of least resistance.

Not that I personally harbor resentment, as im more an "each to their own" kinda person but I also totally get why people get hot about those who choose to skirt the rules. This is less about food safety & more about business - its about having skin in the game. I've saved for 20+ years towards retirement and I've pulled a chunk of that money out to sink into this. It's not going to be cheap or easy to do it the legit way. It's why I spend so much time doing research & asking questions & consulting with experts here & elsewhere & it's why I don't mind taking the time to freely share what I've learned to save someone else the efforts/expense if I can. But the people who choose to do it under the table have no skin in the game. If I fail I'm going to lose a very real chunk of money - don't cry for me Argentina, it's my risk & I accept that because the rewards are there too. But the under the table guy has little to lose yet expects the same gains.

I think SL eluded to that with her statement about reviewers not citing whether a product is hobby or professionally produced. Its like that line from Pacino in Ocean's 13 - "I don't want the labor pains, I just want the baby!"

If you want to have a hobby, have a hobby. It can be fun & creative & rewarding. If you want to start a business, there are pipers to pay, hoops to jump through & the very real chance of failure & economic loss. There aren't shortcuts to legitimacy. You want the baby? Suffer the labor pains. It's that simple.

Again, GREAT post SL.

Flamecycle - please go read about the inception of food & drug regulatory agencies. All due respect, but you couldn't be more off target in your "necessary/effective" commentary.

They are without question both. Are they perfect? Of course not. But it's far better/safer/ smarter to have them than not. History proves this to such a degree it's not even debatable. And I find the notion that we'd be better off without them because we (paraphrasing) can each simply sue companies (e.g. Tort laws) if we get sick to be laughable. Companies have money and lawyers while individuals (e.g. The little guy /consumer) do not. That is at the very core of why agencies are needed for consumer protection. The way you suggest was the old way & it failed spectacularly with 10s of thousands dying from unsafe practices.

Again - start with the beginning of these agencies. Learn why they were created. Then form an opinion on necessary or effective. No offense intended - I just think you're speaking from a poorly formed opinion/perspective with little understanding of the history behind it.

See, now this is the proper forum and a fun time and place for a debate!

LDHS - Can you recommend any sources about the history of the agencies that I can read up on? I doubt they will change my overall perspective much because as stated above I think this is largely a personal freedom issue, but I'm open to considering they may be more effective than I expect.

You have got to be kidding me man.
It's not a personal freedom issue that if the Ph level etc etc etc etc. is wrong you could die.

I get what LDHS is saying with "skin in the game".
I have been a licensed General Contractor for almost 20 years. Lately there have been a lot of contractors go out of "business".
One in particular is building a house in the range of $ 1.5 million, for CASH. The owner knows he's not licensed, so a courier shows up at his house evry Tuesday with an envelope full of cash. (the owners live out of state. This is their third home).
So WHY THE HELL AM I PAYING $5,000. a year, at least, to keep my License, Bond and $ 5million worth of insurance?
Why can't I have a courier come by my house with an envelope full of cash, and forget about all of the "other stuff".
Laws are laws, and my blood is boiling right now. (I should turn his ass in).
Anyway, if the law would fine Homeowners for hiring unlicensed contractors,..... Boy would that pay off for all of us "legals"!

Uuuuhhhhhggggg, sorry, rant over. Nothing to do with sauce making, but the principle is the same.

See, now this is the proper forum and a fun time and place for a debate!

LDHS - Can you recommend any sources about the history of the agencies that I can read up on? I doubt they will change my overall perspective much because as stated above I think this is largely a personal freedom issue, but I'm open to considering they may be more effective than I expect.

So you're unlikely to be swayed by things you haven't read yet?

Seems somewhat closed-minded. Ironically, I'm a libertarian 2nd amendment rights guy who believes in small government - so my core beliefs are pretty closely aligned with the basis of your opions. The difference seems to be that you have your mind made up in advance that these agencies are not necessary nor effective seemingly based on the fact that they exist as government entities.

The documentary was on either PBS or History Chanel - Hulu or some other site might stream it.

flamecycle,
I understand your feeling of wanting to assume responsibility for your own safety and not having any regulations for the food industry. You, and most people here on THP, have some basic food safety knowledge just from being around it here on the forum and seeing all the different posts that talk about food safety.

Does JoeBlow CPA have that same basic food knowledge? What would you think of if you saw a sauce in a woozy bottle with the ingredients listed as "jalapenos, onions, garlic, salt, spices"?

JoeBlow would think "WOW! I love those Flavors! This sounds like a great sauce!" But what's the problem with the sauce described above?

I don't know squat about how to build a house, but I do know I don't want it falling down on my head during the first big wind storm. I'd rather have the building inspector check out the construction to make sure my contractor is following the rules for my and my family's safety.

Don't forget, it's not just you that they are protecting. They are also protecting those who don't know, those who are too young to know.

Say some kids go to the convenience store and buy some chicken strips out of the hot case. Some cheap-ass store manager/owner's trying to save money so they turn down the tempature of the hot case to use less electricity. Now the food is only 125 degrees instead of 160 degrees. You as an adult may take a bite of the chicken strips and realize they aren't as hot as they should be. But those kids won't know the difference. They eat the food, they get sick...and they very likely could DIE!

Who's gonna protect the children? Sure, the parents could sue the store person, but that's not going to bring back a dead child.

Thanks for the links, Ill check them out (probably not for a couple weeks though, I'm in the middle of finals).

So you're unlikely to be swayed by things you haven't read yet?

Unlikely to be swayed in my overall perspective - because even if (and I dont) I believed these agencies produce more safety than we would have without them, I would still believe they should be repealed for stepping on personal liberty.

Flamecycle, WHAT? A "PERSONAL FREEDOM ISSUE"???

Yeppers.

I wont get too far into it. Theres a philosophical issue on the role of government in a just system - people should be free to act so long as they are not interfering with other's freedoms. Selling a sauce doesn't interfere with anyone's freedom, consumers are under no requirement to buy it. You could sell arsenic in a bottle - just accurately inform me whats in it. If I as a consumer chose to buy and eat it, that's also my call - a pretty dumb one if its full of arsenic. I think this applies to the state laws. I agree that we are better off with watchdog groups, I just don't think they should be legally required.

Theres also a constitutional issue for those in the US regarding federal regulations - the constitution limits the federal government to very specifically enumerated powers. Regulating safety of food products isn't one of them. While I am of course aware that the supreme court has over the past century broadly interpreted congress's power to "regulate commerce ... among the several states" to include things such as food safety, I disagree with the line of cases that makes this possible.

Scovie, I understand it is frustrating for you to follow the rules while others don't. I think this is what is behind most of this debate, with the sauce makers on the forum who play by the rules frustrated that other people arent. I agree that is shitty. Everybody should play by the same rules. I just think the rules you are playing by, (the sauce makers - not necessarily yours scovie since I dont know enough about them) are unnecessary rules and we would all be better off if you didnt have to follow them either.

[edit to address SL]

Does JoeBlow CPA have that same basic food knowledge? What would you think of if you saw a sauce in a woozy bottle with the ingredients listed as "jalapenos, onions, garlic, salt, spices"?

JoeBlow would think "WOW! I love those Flavors! This sounds like a great sauce!" But what's the problem with the sauce described above?

I don't know squat about how to build a house, but I do know I don't want it falling down on my head during the first big wind storm. I'd rather have the building inspector check out the construction to make sure my contractor is following the rules for my and my family's safety.

Don't forget, it's not just you that they are protecting. They are also protecting those who don't know, those who are too young to know.

Its a good point SL, and right now JoeBlow would be in more danger without protection. But I think if we didnt grow up in a system where we expected to be "protected," the answer would be yes for a given JoeBlow. The fact that consumers are oblivious is atrophy caused by our perceived protection, and I think we are worse off for it.

Flamecycle - so let me get this straight - you dont have time to read a couple of brief articles to get educated, but you do have time to post 1000 words about something you're not educated about. Because school. Right.

To summarize the words you'd see in those links i generously took the time to provide, Caveat emptor "buyer beware" was the law of the land in the US before these regulatory agencies were formed.

That is the entire premise of your argument - that we the consumer already have a means of recourse - if it makes us sick we can sue. The gov't said "let the buyer beware" and all was right. At least until thousands of men, women & children were harmed and killed by things like poisonous additives or spoiled products or bacteria-laden packaging. Then it wasn't right - it was devastating.

Caveat Emptor - the summary of your suggestion for what we should return to, the utter failure if which forms the very tenant of why we evolved away from that idiocy as a society.

"Personal freedom" is an ignorant standpoint & complete pile of pucky in whatever regard you intended it. And since you've opted to not bother reading what I provided (at your request no less!) this will be my last post to you in this topic.

Yikes, sorry LDHS. I did want those links, I will get to them, and I thank you for looking them up.

And no, I dont have time to be sitting here replying like I am. I am procrastinating badly and really need to get off this board - I didnt know how long or short the sources you provided were, but this is a forum, not a chatroom, threads usually progress a bit slower than this.

I do get the general point - yes I advocate return to a caveat emptor, and I disagree that it is "idiocy" though after reading the links you kindly provided and some additional research maybe I will have a less favorable view of it. I also disagree wholeheartedly that personal freedom is "ignorant."